tv Book TV After Words CSPAN September 19, 2011 12:00am-1:00am EDT
he is buried somewhere there, souvenir hunters have stolen everything. we don't know the exact spots so there is no monument but there is authority foot column with a ridiculous figure on it that's supposed to look like ethan allen and one of the problems i have in this book is what did he look like? painters couldn't make a living on the frontier unless they were doing wainscoting so there were no images from wife but what i discovered the families of the founding fathers were doing a few generations leader is they were getting together for the fourth of july and they were talking about what their ancestors look like, something like what you do to a police artist basically so the first governor of vermont, there was no portrait, but if you have seen one yet seen them all there are still plenty of vermont, same bushy eyebrows etc come and ethan allen i was able to verify somewhat what he looked like because jpmorgan who was buying
everything he could in that period bostick edgings of revolutionary officers and they are held in the morgan library and there is an image of even alan which matches almost exactly the image of even alan dunn in 1929. it's not this. it's not this. this is the statute given to vermont confront's please in such a recall during the nation's capital in the 1870's. each state got one in vermont but even alan where he looks remarkably like marlon brando play napoleon. everything is wrong about it. it's a revolutionary hat with a french revolutionary. the rest of it i think is right but that is not even alan. the family actually came up with a composite sketch of him which is in the book.
this is the first of all street biography of ethan allen and i went to great pains to come up with pictures of the versions of him, but there was a composite describing what he looked at the end of his captivity is a prisoner of war mike and i think that is the closest because i have seen others including his sixth grandson who helped restore the work by giving all of the even allen books and he's a dead ringer for the fellow who was a prisoner of war. so, that's the story of ethan allen. why don't we know more about it? because they took on the puritan clergy and they lived after she died when missionary from new haven came up and literally stumbled even alan's great. they said on february 12th, ethan allen, the general from vermont and he died in presides
in hell where he looks up forever toward heaven from the flames. you get the idea and that went from pulpit to pulpit until his memory went along with it. was revived in the civil war when the green mountain boys swarmed into the uniform at the site of gettysburg and the cold harbor etc. more per-capita fought and died on the union side than any other state and that's also the legacy of ethan allen and the planes that fly to patrol for new york city since 9/11 are the green mountain boys of vermont. his legacy was a state with dissent, never really agreeing even among its congressional delegation from the west side of the mountains to the east side of the mountains but it has a strong reputation for diversity and most of all the legacy of ethan allen and is since his
time where people went to start over, to start again. thank you. [applause] this is where i usually say five-year attwell. >> in the review of your book reference is made to his being an advocate of separation of church and state can you comment further on that? >> is a tug of the established church of new england and his article is just that, he doesn't think that you should have a puritan hierarchy in vermont or in new england. he was speaking mostly to new england. he didn't use the words separation of church and state. that phrase was coined by thomas jefferson in the letter to his secretary of the navy during a
reelection campaign in 1803 that there should be a wall of separation. but jefferson's lolly brooke aligns very well on his book with ethan allen's on the book and both of them firmly believe that there had to be separation between church and state. and indeed in vermont by law in any new community the school had to be built before the church could be built and that is still the case. so that is some proof of it. >> and from arlington vermont, and i think ethan allen's first wife is probably buried right next to the st. james church. >> mary brown. >> yes. >> yes, but arlington is one of the times he beat of the most so it is ironic that she would die there because it was mostly loyalists'. >> and growing up we all knew that down towards west arlington was tory hollow.
>> gistel kaput cory hollen the 1940's. >> it's not a nice word. >> i'm from vermont and i've always called myself a green mountain girl and we used to dress up in costumes and i talked about even having meetings of the tavern and was very much a part of our lives. my dad was a history professor at the green mountain, and he is the man who did the highway markers, the historic markers around vermont, and it's wonderful to hear your research. >> no one ever called them by their last names. >> we use to brinton we would run with the indians in the woods. >> thank you very much for coming. [applause]
coming up next, book tv presents "after words," an hourlong program where we invite guest hosts to interview authors. this week sylvia nasar and her latest book "grand pursuit: the story of economic genius." in it the best-selling author of "a beautiful wind story to the to stop what ticks readers through economics, the most influential theorists and the intellectual pursuits that she believes has helped people all over the world. she talks with u.s. managing
editor of the financial times, gillian tett. >> host: thank you for joining me to talk about your latest book, which is absolutely fascinating covering the issue of economics and the development of economic fought over the last couple of hundred years. can i start by asking you why you decided to write a book about the economics now? >> guest: well i didn't decide now. i decided ten years ago but now is actually a great time because when things are going really well outside of the economics profession they tend not to be as interested in economics and since this book is really aimed at people like i used to be
which is someone who read novels but wanted to know what was happening at the world i think this is a good moment. it's also because the financial crisis and the worst recession in the united states since the 30's it's also a really important time to sort of the things in perspective to take a longer-term perspective and of course writing about the birth of modern economics in the middle of the great victorian boom is a chance to do that, and i learned, first of all i don't have a ph.d. in economics. i dropped out of a ph.d. program, but i felt like i
really learned -- i really learned about the economics in a different way of writing this book because the economics is history don't. it so driven. people don't set out to become an economist the race is about to become a ballet dinsmoor pianist. they may want to be a physicist or mathematician, and something that's happening makes the action go to economic issues and that's how the characters in this book are drawn in. they go there because that is where the action is and that's where they can effect what's going on. a cynic one of the things that fascinates me is many people think that economics is about numbers, it's about complex and
calculations and quite abstract ideas, yet what you tried to do in this book is bring it to life through telling it in the story that people. why did you decide to do that, and it's quite an unusual tactic, isn't it? >> it is, and i think that because my background is in literature, so came at everything through novels and when i did a beautiful mind, i realized that for most people who are not technical, history and biography, i.e. people, is what makes economics accessible, and it may be that when in the wind up liking this book better
than men who read pop science which is usually the best is these wonderful synthetic explanations and that is abstract roomy. so i read in the way that i can to the subject myself, and i hope that it makes -- i know that economics feels alien to people, and as it always has by the way, including to many of the people like alfred marshall or john maynard keynes or beatrice webb's who took it up and it's because it's like a science and most of us need to
come to it through history in three people because really that is what at the end of the day why are people interested in economics? because they are interested in getting some control over their material circumstances. >> host: that's a jury interesting fema. during the last financial crisis and the ensuing recession many people felt very angry with economics and economists are doing well they didn't see these problems coming in 2008 but essentially what you are doing the book is a story of great hope arising after the economics profession. can you explain that? >> part of it is looking at things longer-term.
and it turns out that if you think about at the peak or the debt of the 09 recession in the united states per capita income, personal income which is per capita gdp were higher than any year of the clinton boom or the bush boom. >> but it doesn't feel that way. >> 30% higher than in 1990. so they didn't because you know, for the very simple reason that one-tenth of the workforce out of work made everyone else feel i could be next. >> so expectations have been cranked up for the material wealth in some ways they were shocked by the unemployment
around them. >> so it's a disparity between the long term trend, which is for the dramatically higher levels of living standards and these periodic crises that make everybody feel very insecure. >> your story starts with a much more simple point which is that before the advent of the economic profession the society couldn't actually measure around it and didn't think it could control it in terms of the material well-being. >> guest: win and jane austen was alive that was around 1800, nine tenths of humanity was destitute, okay? in modern terms that would be like 90% of the world population
living on the equivalent of a dollar a day and not only was to be human or meant to be poor but in jane austen' time, which of course was a period already have tremendous opulence for a small group in society -- i'm sorry, i just lost -- >> host: part of the issue was you had people who were not really poor but also for realistic. there was the sense if you like that the world was the way it was and no one could actually measure it or even change it. >> yes, there was the point that not only were nine parts of humanity condemned to judge their way through short and miserable lives, but no one
fought even the most radical and individuals thought that this was anything except the human condition. >> but then of course starting in the 19th century people began to think maybe we don't need to be quite so fatalist but we can try to change. >> 50 years later you have charles dickens writing the christmas carol which is an attack on that kind of fatalism. so what was the difference? well, in the middle of the 19th century the modern economic miracle begins, and what does that mean? it means that for 2,000 years the average human being lived like a roman slave in material conditions that were comparable
to livestock, lived in one-room with a lot of other people and animals, couldn't read, no medical care, eight data, and inadequate food etc., and by the time dickens comes along in the so-called forties', he is writing about another possible that the in other words, an economy that is so abundant, so productive that that old life sentence of most people was no longer necessary. >> but one of the things that changed moving away from this vision of the inevitability that when the population got bigger the resources of exhausted because there is a limited
number of resources to the people begin to appreciate the fact that you could actually increase the resources to becoming more productive. t want to explain how that shift took place? >> what happened is that you never before had a sustained rise in productivity and just for the benefit of people listening, productivity is the amount that is produced per worker, and what it means is if a country has high productivity it means they are taking the same resources, the same human beings from the same natural resources, but accomplishing a lot more, and productivity naturally determines how much is available for consumption, so it
is the determinant of wages and of living standards, and for 2,000 years through the rise and fall of great empires, the romans, the chinese, the ottoman , all of which had made a great inventions, great discoveries, had a great artistic achievement. none of that -- none of that human invention, none of that progress is science and philosophy ever change the way the average person lived, okay? and then from the middle of the 19th century, right about the time that marx and engels say that what you can expect is just increasing misery from then until now you have had a tenfold
increase in the standard of living around the world. this is the world average, including the poorest as well as the richest countries. so this is something -- this is not a few good years. this was a complete takeoff from what had been the human condition, and the fury which said that a few good years with rising wages would simply result in earlier marriages and more children and their for the return to subsistence actually was a brilliant description of what had happened for all of recorded history until a few decades after his death. >> host: and then of course people realize it is impossible to increase the pipe -- >> guest: yes. and, you know, i thought a lot
about okay, so why is the first society on earth, in the wind, the first society on earth to have a sustained permanent cumulative rise in productivity and average living standards, body is victorian angel and the symbol of the horrors of the industrial revolution. in other words why do most people who learn about see it as a period of retrogression, and i thing or what i concluded is that once you acknowledged and imagine mankind could control its material circumstances, then poverty became a problem instead of just inevitable.
>> host: that is one of the things to point to because when people realized poverty could actually be controlled, then it became incumbent on the government to think about ways of actually responding to that and trying to be alleviated and that began to feel that to some of the first ideas of the welfare state or the will of the state which we take for granted now but of course but in the 19th century they were novel, weren't they? >> guest: that's right, and this is another area where preconception's were really overturned because i have always thought that the welfare state was either the invention of new deals around fdr in the great depression or else the 1945 labor government after world war ii. and lo and behold, you know, so a product of disastrous times
and you know, quite advanced and to the 20th century and lo and behold it turns out that the idea of the welfare state and the first experiments in welfare state or product such this victorian plume before world war war i and the invention of a woman. >> host: i find this one of the most fascinating person the book because i didn't think that this woman was at all well known what inside of the economics profession but let alone outside of the economics profession. tell me about the woman concerned. >> guest: beatrice webb who was born beatrice potter was a rich, beautiful heiress, the daughter of a railroad magnate and she had eight sisters. they all married a rich powerful and influential men.
well, beatrice was an odd and a lonely child who had other ideas for herself. it turned out that her mother had written a novel and had been an activist in the free trade campion of the 1840's, had come from a family of manchester's order to liberal businessmen and was best friends with the philosopher named herbert spencer commesso beatrice really had to invent herself. she spent about 15 years trying to figure know what to do. she was terribly torn between,
you know, her own family and the social society expectations that she married rich and powerful man and in fact she become hopelessly infatuated with really i think the best looking ahead definitely the best dressed politician in england, joseph chamberlain who fyi is neville chamberlain's tauter. >> host: >> guest: and on top of not knowing should forge my own career as these middle class women were doing in the sort of bohemian circumstances become the social workers and writers but you know beatrice wasn't sure the was a social move she wanted to end up in or should i
married on top of that he kind of rejected her, and it looked like -- and then her father got ill and she had to care for him. she was in so many ways epitomized i don't know if you have read the portrait of the leedy, but she epitomized the first generation of women who had enough of a choice that the one could actually talk about what is she going to do with her life and there was some assistance because it might not be the conventional camp. in the end, beatrice was very lucky because she married a short and not a very handsome but very smart socialist who was
best friends with shaw. she went from being a total free-market purists and disciple to the point of view that was actually becoming very popular in england, which is one of social reform, and she became involved in the fabians and focus on the government role in preventing not only ely feeding but preventing poverty, and reading her book she wrote a book called poverty and destitution which is an analysis of poverty in this of 18 etds,
that period and i think people should read it today. she was half that time until her death in 1940 she was one of the most famous people in new england and was considered the first major female economist even though today we would think of as a sociologist. she was active not only with cbs but the labor party and nobody knows who she is, but that book is a brilliant analysis of poverty in the sense that it makes it clear that in contrast to say marks and ingalls analysis of poverty which was simplistic would be the kind word but she shows there are many different reasons for poverty and that preventing
poverty has to be based on understanding those reasons, and her argument for the government role was actually very sophisticated. she picked up on something that alfred marshall have identified which is there's some kinds of poverty that are caused by poverty and that of course is the inter generational stuff, so she developed a rationale for government activism. you couldn't have called her a modern-day liberals because in many respects she was quite conservative. but she had the ideas that winston churchill when he was a young man a rising politician
discovered poverty in the early 1900's she was, you know, she was the inventor of the think tank and she's a white church and his partner david lloyd george with the sort of policy vision that they implemented in a liberal government around 1908. >> host: it's a great testament to your book that you've managed to bring this person to life who is so little known and so some of the other characters in your book karl marx and frederick ingalls are better known. i mean, you tell their story and try to explain how their lives helped to develop their idea, too didn't you? >> guest: i have a lot of fun with marks and ingalls because again, look, all these people i
write about, there are dozens of biographies and i am not pretending to come up with great new original fact or insights, but again, i never realized that karl marx never went darken the door factory. a poster that is one of the fascinating rooms to the cuddy tells he stayed in his room and was cut off while essentially ingalls to all the hard work. >> guest: that's right. the delay. the one job -- he was also the world's biggest slacker because the one job he held in a newland which is constantly being described in growing terms he was a columnist supposedly for the new york herald, and until the civil war it turns out that
ingalls goes through it every single line. now the other thing they're really blew me away is that marks in come which came largely from inheritance and course from his guardian angel put him in the top 5% of british households so this was, you know, these were all kind of regulations. i'm sure that, you know, in fact i know that some scholars have discovered these facts could never emphasize them enough. >> host: the fact you bring together the human stories and the development of ideas and try to explain how they together we've into the tapestry of intellectual history through the
19th century but another character i found fascinating new book was a lesser known was hayek and his rather tragic life in which in many ways captures the tensions in the 20th century >> guest: i was very observed by hayek because she was in that generation with his cousin lewd of young men who were who had grown up in one world just as they were getting ready to go to -- wound up in this pity miss war then destroy it the globalist economy on which vienna in particular depended and also witnessed the rise of
the totalitarian socialism. what i find so interesting about him is that. by the time he died in 1992 and i wrote an obit for him for "the new york times" he was a great figure on the right and see it with reagan and thatcher. but, you know, i was going to say it almost seemed like an ideologue but in going over and learning about his early work is very different -- post to its different to understand the
intensity with which to pursue their ideological positions if you understand the intensity with which these experienced in their lives and seen their worlds literally ripped apart. >> and also how while hayek was wrong about something namely the great depression would cure itself he was also really write about the other things for example he went to new york in 1923 to study economic forecasting which was the golden age people developed it and fell in love with it he thought he couldn't predict the economy. now when people say what's wrong with economists they didn't see this coming.
well guess what, modern economics is not about predictions, it's about figuring out how you can have a successful economy were successful portfolio without the need to predict that was hayek. in the 20's when extreme forms of socialism were extremely popular and of course the soviet union had just been founded and was exporting revolution he and his associates in vienna figure out the very modern reasons that it couldn't period. why? because they saw the competitive economy as an information system
so when socialism collapsed, most people think that one of the main reasons was exactly what he then pointed. >> host: one thing that emerges from your book which is fascinating is what someone might call the dialectic. intellectual thought was in one direction, goes too far some people reacted with the other direction and of course it was partly because people like hayek of the economics and reaction to marks and ingalls that paved the way for someone like keynes to become much more influential going forward and saying there is a role for the welfare state or for the state and trying to manage the economy. >> i was fascinated. now again, it can't be the first person to point it out, but after world war ii, keynes who
had been at the oversight peace conference at the end of world war i and have warned but not been able to convince the allies that by neglecting economic recovery they were reporting political disaster after world war ii of course cannes was instrumental setting up the international monetary system because if you think about the kind of debt crisis that we have now. after world war i and world war ii was immense and that is one of the reasons that the economy, especially of europe was frozen that would reconstitute itself,
and cannes took the opposite view, hence brentonwood and the effort of the allies to make sure they didn't make the same mistake as after world war i. well, isaiah berlin actually wrote the very best biography of marks was stationed in the british embassy in washington during and after the war and when hayek had written this, all the people who couldn't participate in the war effort wrote books was about the danger of totalitarianism to the free-market space societies. so high it came over on a book tour and all of these republicans were, you know, just
waiting to make him the poster child when he turned around and supported the cause that they hated most of all which was bretton woods. so that was another thing that these people are not ideologues' but because they are championed by the right and left and you never hear the positions they took that seem to contradict, you know, the naim position responsive. >> it was the intellectual tapestry that emerges is constructed of threads going in different directions, and it's one of the most interesting things about this whole book is looking at it at the whole. if i had one regret about your book it is a terrific read but it's the fact that you and the 1970's -- your last character of
course was a towering figure and in some ways trust to synthesize these divergent intellectual currents. >> right. well, other than the fact it would have been a thousand page book, look, the idea at the core of the book that was the desire to put mankind in the saddle in some control of the material circumstances the idea to trees that from london and 1840's to the outward as it rippled outward but by the time that you get to the marchant comes from india that journey, the
realization that it can happen anywhere what counts is not how much resources you have for how much land, but what you do with it, that people yes, they make terrible mistakes, but yes they can be charged to manage their affairs. that idea had really spread around the world. >> we've come full circle. >> so it seemed like a natural stopping point. i mean, -- >> host: it raises the key question. where do you think the economics profession is going now and if you were to write an epilogue or post script who would you put in the 1970's as the big figures
who have woven the next stage of the intellectual tapestry? >> welcome a look one thing that's very clear is economics as a science as an appellate practice as a profession is booming and you can get any data, try to get into the top graduate program and economics, good luck. you have to be absolutely at the top of your class. you know, academic economists are pulling down very high salaries. >> host: quite a bit more than the right of a journalist and sure. >> guest: exactly. we seem to be going in opposite directions. if you look at books, last year i was invited to be on a panel that i unfortunately didn't get to go to the american economics association.
>> host: i was at that meeting in denver. >> guest: someone told me there were 500,000 people there -- 5,000. the number of books about economics, you know, is staggering. so, this is a vibrant profession. people feel like here is an area where it's like genetics right now. why are a lot of biologists going? because that's where the action is command economics which by the way it's supposed to have been more since the 1840's and has been repeatedly declared to be such is doing fine. >> host: it might have actually promised too much in terms of the ability to control or improve the world?
>> guest: i'm sure that is true because i think that in psychiatry we were going to have drugs control schizophrenia and in medicine we were going to have your cancer. there's no question that like irving fisher in the 1920's irving fisher who is the greatest american economist of the 20th century and had the incredible insight of the inflationary booms and deflationary depressions stem from the same cause they all promise to much. >> so it's been a victim of the success? >> guest: yes, but it is true of all science is. you talk to a physicist and talked a medical researcher that's the nature of the thing especially of course as my
friends in england would say the american. >> host: do you think because there is no such a cacophony of different places that it's going to be much harder for any one single intellect to come out and it denies the age if you look today if you to pick one or two key people from the current decade who would you choose as being -- >> guest: i would choose probably again theorists and any number of that is a number that is really vibrant there's bg neuroeconomics especially behavioral finance and all the stuff that descended from daniel, then that's a very vibrant area. a lot of the stuff that is on the cusp between psychology and
economics, you know, what i would say is the insight, the basic insight that we really need to know about to conduct our lives are probably the earlier ones. >> host: sola the economic profession is very busy now, we can go back and knock off the last 30 years and still know enough about the world to understand it? >> guest: it's like medicine. you know, the breakthroughs in medicine that affect our lives are not the most advanced techniques today. so, that is quite a humbling for a thing for the economics profession to hear today.
>> guest: ask yourself how has economics gone to the new insights it's almost always been because the existing model of the existing pherae is inadequate incomplete or downright wrong that house and i suppose i guess i don't know enough about the natural sciences to know whether that is typical but both teams and fisher it turned into the depression when that did not write itself with monetary policy as they thought it would they both went back to the drawing board that is when they read the general theory and that's when fisher went on.
so economics -- the interest in economics now because people are looking for what was it that was missing? >> guest: >> host: that is a good question to leave it on. having written this book, are you more admiring of the economics profession now or less when you start it? >> guest: much more. >> host: that's a very encouraging note to end on particularly the time that we suffered such a big economic turmoil and many people on the economic certainly recommend this book. it's an interesting inspect date in sight i haven't thought about before setting to free lunch. >> guest: thank you.
khalid sheikh mohammed is about four years of the time and his father dies and when i search for the death records apparently is father died in 1969 and the kuwaitis simply didn't keep records of president death, marriage is it just wasn't interesting to them so they have this account of his father's death but it's very sparse and there is no official transcript to back it up his father dies and there's no welfare in the state and there is no organized charity for the forerunners of the time so his mother takes the job washing the bodies of the dead preparing them for burial. it's a very low status
low-income job but it enables a living. at the time she has nine children, calling it shake is the fourth male. years pass on an khalid sheikh mohammed is doing very well at school. he's a good student and a bookish boy. and the family decides they don't have any money at all but the need to back the one son to get an education and that one son this is typical in the arab families at this period with the time to support the rest of them. and he is khalid sheikh mohammed and ultimately he applies to the schools north carolina and historical baptist school in murfreesboro north carolina. and either the family saved some money or more likely the muslim brotherhood of kuwait has agreed to sponsor him.
he joined the muslim brotherhood after his older brothers have joined at age 16 so he arrives in america at roughly 18-years-old and he's not prefer what he sees i picked him up at the airport outside of the virginia beach and durkan to murfreesboro and what he remembers years later the memory is khalid sheikh mohammed being surprised by what he saw and a first piece of the suppressed by the geography of the intense greenery when you see the trees in kuwait they are usually behind the walls and the privately-owned here they were just trees everywhere but more surprisingly and more strange and more off-putting than the trees or the people and what they were doing. they're sitting in lawn chairs on the front lawn visible from the road they're going out and playing with their kids taking a hose to the bushes outside the
front window but what surprised him was so much of american family life happening in public and this is not the kind of thing that would happen in the arab world and the more time that he spent in north carolina, the more was persuaded americans are really backward. they did things that should be private and public the trust each other very quickly and they didn't go out at night. after dark is when most social occasions what happened in kuwait and many arab countries but in the united states in murfreesboro with the time in 83 come 8481 pizza parlor no bars. the pizza parlor closed at 9:00. the town was asleep. so far from the night being alive and social and friendly, it was as silent as the tomb.
it was the day that americans were busy. so he became more and more alienated by america because it wasn't an arab country. these are very small observations. these are things by themselves the do not make any terrorist, but it does set him at odds with the country. there's nothing that she did other than making the service that made him part of its larger community. in fact, one of the things i learned in writing mastermind is there's nothing our civilian colleges to to integrate foreign students to explain to country to them. when the fbi searched the car of the 9/11 hijackers left behind the airport the found a small spiral bound notebook and a very careful arabic script there was a description explain the differences between shampoo, conditioner and body washed we think they're easily understood what from another culture
another time it's puzzling. maybe an explanation is in order for the foreign students so naturally he spent most of his time in college with not just of their abstinence but other curator of students. he didn't even mix with the non-arabs. after a semester the transfer to north carolina a at t jesse jackson on a modern cure he studies engineering began the social network is very limited. of 50 or 20 people all of whom are muslim and all of whom are to lead the arab, some of them transferred with him. but he emerges as someone that is known on campus as in the law, technically he is not, but what they mean by that is she as an enforcer. he makes sure the other students and his group do not violate these very small and very obscure temmins of the islamic law or what they believe to be
islamic law. for the sample, the cost of your pants can never cover your ankles it is forbidden ever to wear shorts because the exposed any and so on so they go to the gym and work out it would be fully covered in for some of these differences could them apart from the american college campus i met a number of people almost a dozen in fact went to college who remember him and by the way they must remember him fondly he was a comedian and a student trip and as the night show where he put on plays and skits and very successfully and apparently humorously imitate various arab leaders and the other arab students and i couldn't find anyone who wasn't a to the arab who wasn't muslim who knew him well in school his
lab partner just remembers him as a person with three broken english and his professors were good in math and science and had a substantial conversation with him about anything that didn't involve molecules and formulas so he wasn't in north carolina for almost four years but the cannon to contact with americans in a very glancing basis. it is as if you are changing planes in a strange city and what through the airport. have you met the people of, say, cincinnati? not really. you pass by them. that is what he did for four years. he sells isolated himself and he policed the borders, the perimeter in the social perimeter to limit the contact with americans. but sometimes events intervene and one of the things i learned which is a surprise to me is that he had a criminal record in the united states and i am surprised other investigators in the government didn't turn this up but he liked to drive at high
speed with a retired driver's license and he would go through the streets of greensboro and other parts of north carolina eisel to much of the dukes of hazzard. i don't know. but he would occasionally crash. one day the two women are talking in a parked car, some urgent confidence that couldn't go on in the living room i imagine. when the car is smashed by khalid sheikh mohammed. injuries are so severe they sue him. i found a copy of the lawsuit. the last name by the ways christian verses mohammed. [laughter] ultimately they win the case. they are awarded more than $10,000 in 1985 which is a substantial sum of money the types of injuries were fairly severe. he never pays. he dodges the sheriff but i